and
go back and forth on whether President Obama saying it's a "good time to buy stocks" vindicates Stephen Harper's similar comments. Adam differentiates the comments on the grounds that Harper was already showing that he was out-of-touch with the economic crisis and thus his "good time to buy" line exacerbated the situation. Obama, by contrast, has shown he understands the magnitude of the crisis and if anything, most of the criticisms of Obama are that he is doing too much to "stimulate" the economy (and run up deficits). There is of course another key difference; Harper made the comment on October 7, 2008. Since then, the S&P/TSX Composite Index
just under 20% per cent. In other words, Harper was wrong. October 7th was a terrible time to buy stocks. It was actually a very good time to sell whatever stock you still owned. There was of course no way to know that for certain on October 7th, which is why prime ministers don't usually predict market movements. I have no idea if today is a better time to buy than October 7th. The index is 20% cheaper but that doesn't necessarily make it a better buy. Things could still get much, much worse. Or not. I have no idea what is going to happen to the economy or the market over the next number of months and years. Of course, neither does Barack Obama. So, while I have no problem with presidents or prime ministers acting as cheerleaders-in-chief for their economies, the notion of them acting as financial advisors to the nation is equally silly on either side of the border. So yes, I maintain my mockery of Stephen Harper on this issue and now extend it to President Obama.